Search results

This case was written using primary data through various channels, including in-depth structured interviews with the CEO and other individuals at the Crisis Center of Tampa Bay (CCTB), as well as exchanging email messages and phone conversations with employees at CCTB. All interviews were recorded and transcribed. In addition, one of the authors took a tour of the main offices of CCTB and took notes on the physical facilities as well as the information provided by the tour guide. Public information from CCTB was used to enhance the information and provide background. All accounts presented in this case are real, and no information was altered or fabricated.

Clara Reynolds had been CEO of CCTB for over eight years. The agency had almost tripled its budget in the time she had been there. Her leadership style had positively impacted the culture of the organization. Employees valued her open and transparent leadership style. Employees saw her commitment to training employees, creating work–life balance and helping employees be exceptional at their jobs. There was an issue, however, with Transcare, the organization’s ambulatory service. The performance of the business was declining, and Clara wanted to update the board within 60 days at the next quarterly board meeting. She was not sure what she could do to increase engagement with Transcare’s staff, which would show the board that the staff was fully willing to do what was necessary.

This case is appropriate for teaching undergraduate or graduate-level courses in leadership, organizational behavior or principles of management. It is designed to be discussed during one class period. It will save time and improve the flow if the students read the case before class and are prepared when they arrive. Any information needed for the case discussion has been presented in the case; no further research by the students is necessary. Students should think about the role of leadership in a nonprofit. They should put themselves in the protagonist’s shoes throughout the reading of the case.

The tremendous relevance of societal discrimination to special education of the learning disabled cannot be gainsaid. Mistreatment of disabled children in public and private educational institutions is a bad reflection on the moral and egalitarian values of the society at large. “Many students, regardless of race, who are deemed eligible to receive special education services [mandated by federal laws] are unnecessarily isolated, stigmatized, and confronted with fear and prejudice” (Losen & Welner, 2001, p. 407). According to the U.S. Congress, “poor African-American children are 2.3 times more likely to be identified by their teacher as having mental retardation than their white counterpart” (20 U.S.C. §1400 (8)(c) Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)). Congress has also found that a highly disproportionate number of elementary and secondary special education students are African-Americans (IDEA §1400 (8)(D)) and their social disadvantage stems from “lack of opportunities in training and educational programs, undergirded by the practices in the private sector that impede their full participation in the mainstream society” (IDEA §1400 (10)).

Struggling writers and students with disabilities tend to have difficulties with multiple aspects of the writing process. Therefore, in this chapter, we describe Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD; Harris, Graham, Mason, & Friedlander, 2008). SRSD is a writing intervention with extensive research demonstrating its effectiveness for improving the writing quality of struggling writers and students with disabilities when implemented by both teachers and researchers in a variety of educational settings. We also describe an ineffective writing practice, stand-alone grammar instruction. Although this type of grammar instruction is explicit, it is removed from an authentic writing context, and decades of research have demonstrated its negative effects on students’ writing quality. We close the chapter with recommendations for future research on SRSD as well as general suggestions for teachers who provide writing instruction to struggling writers and students with disabilities.

Background: the increased incidence of psychosis in African‐Caribbeans in the UK compared to the white British population has been frequently reported. The cause for this is unclear; social factors are said to account for this increase and one factor that is often cited is discrimination.Aims and method: we have looked at two groups of psychotic patients, blacks of Caribbean origin and white British, and present a qualitative comparison of the individual's experience of unfair treatment and its perceived cause.Results: the African‐Caribbean patients did not describe more perceived discrimination than their white counterparts but were more likely to claim that their distress was due to racial discrimination perpetrated by the psychiatric services and society in general. The white patients were more likely to attribute perceived discrimination to their mental illness.Conclusion: this mismatch of explanatory models between black patients and their doctors may account for some inequalities in their treatment, their relative non‐engagement and adverse outcome.Declaration of interest: none.

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).

Studies of public policy, particularly the explanation and prediction of policy outcomes, are motivated by a desire to improve policy success. However, most policies fall far short of solving problems. Why is it so difficult for policy to succeed? Biology's answer: because we are human. Many natural tendencies are less than optimal for the policy cognition and behavior necessary to make effective policy popular. The portions of human nature which are most interesting for our purposes include the way humans think, the role of emotion, the power of interpersonal relationships, the power of belonging to a group, and the power of competition for status. These human realities anticipate ineffective policy development. Knowing something about humans might explain why it is difficult for policy to succeed.

This paper explores how firms within the audience measurement industry, specifically its radio and television markets, have navigated myriad market and nonmarket challenges. The market strategies and the nonmarket forces that constrain those strategies are largely defined by two features: the delineation of its geographic markets by political boundaries and markets that have natural monopoly characteristics. While the pre-monopoly stage or periods of competition may be comparatively short-lived, they are still telling. Monopolists undertake market strategies designed to ensure that they are not supplanted and nonmarket actions geared to avoiding undesirable constraints and reputational damage. Depending on their legal and regulatory environment, customers of the measurement services have used both market and nonmarket actions to mitigate the market power of the audience measurement firms. This paper focuses primarily on the U.S. radio and television audience measurement markets that Arbitron and Nielsen, respectively, have dominated for decades. Non-U.S. markets, which frequently feature America’s foremost firms, illustrate alternatives to America’s largely laissez-faire approach.

Measures of risk employed in mental health settings in the last 20 years have consisted of clinical scales that comprise both historical and clinical factors. Examples of such tools include the widely used HCR‐20 (Webster et al, 1997), SVR‐20 (Boer et al, 1997) and VRS (Wong & Gordon, 2000). Such tools are time‐intensive and, in the main, completed by an independent rater. At present there is a lack of systems to guide teams to investigate salient risk factors related to mental state and violent offending that inform treatment effectiveness, change and, ultimately, risk assessment decisions. This paper describes the application of such a system. The Standard Goal Attainment Scaling for Sex Offenders (GAS‐S) (Hogue, 1994) has been modified for use with violent offenders and is presented herewith. Application of the tool to the Violent Offender Treatment Programme (VOTP) is discussed, alongside its potential usefulness in informing risk assessment and the effectiveness of treatment intervention.